Banks should be boring
Today investors on the stock market gave something of thumbs down to shares in Royal Bank of Scotland and HBOS - which means that we as taxpayers will almost certainly end up owning around 60 per cent of Royal Bank of Scotland and about 40 per cent of a new super-bank created by Lloyds TSB's rescue takeover of HBOS.
Think about that for a second - because it is one of the great events in the history of the British economy.
Both of these giant banks are central to how we create wealth in this country.
They look after the savings of countless millions.
They lend to countless millions.
They grease the wheels of capitalism.
But the incompetence of RBS and of HBOS means that we as taxpayers have had to bail them out to the tune of £31.5bn.
Chances are that this is the moment when future historians will say that the tide turned decisively against almost-anything-goes, laisser-faire financial capitalism (what I described yesterday as an important strand of Thatcherism) - which has been the prevailing ideology for almost 30 years.
It'll end because some bankers themselves have been chastened and will choose to mend their ways - and others will be hectored into doing so by the City watchdog, the Financial Services Authority, and the Treasury.
Till just a few weeks ago, the City and our banks - the financial services industry - swaggered that they were the great British success in a country with few other world-beating industries.
But as boom year followed boom year, and fat bonus followed fat bonus, many banks and bankers became over-confident, arrogant.
They forgot the essence of good banking, which is to know your customer, to measure the risks when lending or investing, and to never lend more than the customer can afford.
A great and enduring bank is almost invisible, a dull and self-deprecating provider of basic services - not the puffed up, too-clever-by-half firms that many big banks became over the past few years.
The humiliation of RBS and HBOS will probably cut all our hubristic banks down to size - it should return us to a world of simpler, safer banking.
Which would probably be a good thing - although it means the City of London will probably shrink over several years.
And that'll be a drag on the economy as a whole - unless and until they achieve what many would like them to do, which is to provide finance and nourishment for wealth-creating industries that are less prone than is the City to boom and bust.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~33~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
For what it's worth, these are the safeguards as I see it:
-- A return to prudent lending (eg mortgages with at least a 20% deposit and no more than 3x salary), which will ensure that house prices fall and become more realistic and affordable;
-- Shady 'off balance sheet' items that are currently invisible to us to be declared on balance sheets as 'dodgy assets' and 'potential liabilities';
-- A minimum acceptable and gradually increasing fractional reserve requirement for banks asap;
-- Governments legislating to make certain mad-cap contracts -- or 'bets' -- in truly monstrous and looming derivatives (eg credit default swaps) null and void before they really sink us ... if international law will allow a change in the rules when the race has already begun;
-- Investment in value, not in debt.
Complain about this comment
i hate i told you so's but any fool looking at the figures would have noticed that the banks would need at least 10 times what they recieved just becouse the shares market is dropping and globaly it seems the stockmarket will continue to hit prices untill it is shut down or it will continue to eat billions like jelly beans.
but hey the government knows best who are we to argue with there over hyped muched publicised concepts that has them riding to the rescue on a wave of taxpayers money playing to the press and looking good.
Complain about this comment
Thanks, Robert...a spledidly worded piece... and about time the Banks and their executive officers be called to account. In a sense they are, or maybe, should be, 'public servants'. That is what some are about to become. then let them serve...with pride, with dignity and with some degree of skill and expertise.
Complain about this comment
What about the good news today? Shares rocket? Feel good factor index up a point or two? How can six points down be a plunge, yet six points up is not mentioned? Reporting needs to be a balance to remain credible.
Complain about this comment
What they forgot, Robert, was that just because everyone else is doing something doesn't mean it is any *less* risky. Risk thinking seems to have gone out of the window at the banks and that, ultimately, is the fault of management.
There is a history of our financial sector creating risky products, sating itself on them and then coming to grief. Think of railway shares in 1845; think of junk bonds in the 1980s; and now, CDS products in the 'oughties'.
What we need is not so much regulation as a sustained effort to save financial institutions from themselves. I say let's outlaw - with stiff penalities - dealing in any derivative instruments without a clear statement of risk/return, and don't let the financial sector ever use the argument again that, just because they can see three thousand others dealing in rubbish products that they must be safe products...
Complain about this comment
Having logged on and gone past the news front page photo of the 2 guys( supposedly ) at the top, you have to almost want to launch a caption contest. The blank look on the PM's face- incredulity at how his Chancellor is making a complete mess up - or the slight of hand gesture from Alistair....could be a case of the right hand not knowing what the dodgy-looking left hand is doing. And Tony..? has to be laughing all the way... but maybe not to the bank(s).
Complain about this comment
'The humiliation of RBS and HBOS will probably cut all our hubristic banks down to size - it should return us to a world of simpler, safer banking'.
This will be as nothing compared to the humilaition of our hubristic Prime Minister once his smokescreen of twisting spin and endless parade of out and out falsehoods clears. Dear Gordon has always been one for burying bad policy and mistakes under shovel loads of dark arts complexity. People are on to you my old son regardless of political affiliation. Nice to see Mandy and Campbell back, real progress there!
Complain about this comment
This is a giant sticking plaster. We need a wholly new approach to global finance that recognises that we cannot have infinite economic growth in a finite ecology.
Only if that nettle is grasped is there likely to be a sustainable future on the planet.
Complain about this comment
So what guidelines does Brown give to banks to lend as much as last year? A simple case would be a small retailer who has a £100,000 overdraft with a second charge on his house as collateral. He now wants to renew his overdraft. Problem now is that the value of his house has gone down so that security is no longer available. What does the Bank do?
As a taxpayer and now a shareholder in the Bank I would not want my money risked in this way....and of course this is how we got into this sorry state in the first place. Bad banking. No more of it, Brown.
Complain about this comment
Of course the bank shares are falling. The government is taking over a chunk of them which means that the shareholders percentage of the total is reduced, hence the shareprice falls. It would have been astonishing if they hadn't.
Much more important is how the shares in almost every other industry are rallying today which suggests confidence that the crisis might now pass.
Complain about this comment
Do you think the banks will mend their ways? Let's face it, they will be chastened for a few years, then when things get better will be claiming "have to pay rate for the job", "global job market" etc.
The idea of Brown or Cameron or Clegg going to one of those banquets at the Mansion House and saying "your wages are too much" is a joke.
Speculative bubbles go hand in hand with the expansion of the economy. Marx pointed this out about 1847 (British railway swindle), 1857 (European wide slump). Since then we have had 1929 and the 1980s.
Read volume three of Capital on money and credit; its very instructive.
Complain about this comment
Now its all over, how about a story on who leaked what to whom and when. We will need this when in a few years time the government sells these shares at a massive profit. So I presume it wasn't a government official?
Complain about this comment
Agree with the first comment but let us be clear that a return to old-fashioned relationship banking means that the economy will grow slowly for some time to come if lending is restrained by banks' balance sheets.
Not complaining but it will be painful for all of us.
Complain about this comment
I agree that what we need is exporting and manufacturing industries to replace the lost financial services that will inevitably flow out in the coming months,
Problem is manufacturing has been run down to such a low base it cannot fill the gap needed to provide jobs in the short term.
An even greater problem is the low cost of labour in Asia which we cannot compete with.
Research and Development was always our strong point but Asia is now overtaking us there too.
Companies in Europe are so heavily restricted by Health and Safety and Employment Laws they will be trading with one hand tied behind their backs against somewhere like China which has a free for all attitude to such things.
China will not change so Europe has to decide whether to chuck these laws out of the window to be competitive or just look on in envy as we all disappear down the tubes. Any quick fix this government is looking at is just that. A quick fix!
Perhaps everyone should be looking to move elsewhere if they want some sort of future.
Complain about this comment
There is very little objective evidence that banks, in this country atleast, lent excessively. Indeed reading the interim results of the likes of Lloyds TSB and HBOS indicates that though, impairment losses are up, they have not exceeded normal operating profits. Indeed HBOS recorded an mortgage impairment loss this year of 0.09% of the total amount lent out for mortgages, well within a normal profit margin. Also, it is worth checking out an old Barclays annual report: [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]it reminds us of happier times when banks were actually allowed to make a small loss without having their face stuffed full of used notes.
Complain about this comment
...But they are still reaping the rewards of what are basically 'ill gotton gains'. Can we re-address this - so rent control for the millions living in 'buy-to-let' flats and houses?
Complain about this comment
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/12/economic-dishonor-roll-vi_n_134018.html
Let's start pointing out the villains and clearing them out.
From now on I only want to see them running whelk stalls!
Complain about this comment
Banking is dead. Long live banking.
I worked for a major bank in the 90s as it struggled to recover from the last recession and house market crash. Bankers were circumspect about their lending for roughly 5 minutes before they realised that prudent lending practices would not deliver sufficient profits.
That said, the bank in question appears to have curbed enough of its hubris in the noughties to have avoided going cap in hand to taxpayers (so far.) So perhaps there is some small hope for the industry.
Complain about this comment
"A great and enduring bank is almost invisible, a dull and self-deprecating provider of basic services - not the puffed up, too-clever-by-half firms that many big banks became over the past few years."
You could say the same thing about BBC reporters too. They should be reporting the news and not being too clever by half.
Complain about this comment
I always thought the idea of borrowing money to buy shares was a BAD idea? How prudent is that Mr Brown????!
And to demand that banks raise their mortgage lending to last year's levels is frightening.
A comment by one of the senators during the US bailout debate was that investors should be BUYING shares. And this just prior to the market DROPPING 30%.
I agree that something big needs to be done, but not propping up an artifically high property market nor buying into bank shares too early when they could have been purchased for next to nothing when the proverbial really hits the fan.
Gordon Brown scares me. What scares me more is that the UK population now appear to believe he knows what he is doing. Have they learnt nothing?
Complain about this comment
Well, Robert, Polly Toynbee and the rest of the folks over at the Guardian would be proud of your latest blog.
Double blows at Capitalism and Thatcherism in one piece.
The debacle at our Banks proves once again that people are venal, sheep-like and self interested, but it does not prove that the system is necessarily wrong. Some very good things will emerge from this purge (such as bonuses in the form of shares), but we must never forget that it is us, the public, that borrowed more than we could afford. It's not just bad lending, it's bad borrowing that's at fault.
Complain about this comment
As a german, my true dream is, that this concerted action of mainly GB, France and Germany, with the whole Eurozone, will have success and will change the views of some eurosceptics in the UK, especially in England.
The problems that took the whole world in, were, imho, based in the USA, and the anglo-american way of economy was not able to hinder their mistakes. Just the opposite.
Remember, as the US proclaimed their Paulson plan, the share markets went down. After Europe and GB stood together today, they boomed. And how much easier it would have been, if the UK was part of the Eurozone.
And how much luck we had, that one of the "big three" countries was in charge as european presidency in this crisis.
Imagine the problems we will have in the next year, when Sweden and the CR will have to lead.
How much easier we could manage it, if the political union would have be agreed. With a presidency that does not rotade every 6 months, if you have to handle problems that take years to solve.
And not lady luck would decide, wether a big country with all his diplomatic and economic ressources speaks for Europe, or maybe Malta.
Complain about this comment
The media seem to be painting this deal as something very simple and certain to work. In fact they are portraying it as almost too good to be true. Is it?.
Complain about this comment
Oh, and Buddhaman (comment 8, above), one thing has been proved by this crisis, and it is that when the chips are down, no one really gives a damn about global warming. Including me. It is just a western middle class angst that is in any event a non-issue to 80% of the world's population.
Complain about this comment
Have these banks really promised to maintain mortgage lending at 2007 levels? Surely this has to be a misunderstanding of some sort, as that cannot happen. Somebody somewhere is having a laugh, because it would be beyond stupid to even contemplate maintaining anything approaching 2007 lending levels. Surely nobody in the treasury would be so naive? It has to be a joke, it simply must be.
Could we have some clarification on this? It may seem like a minor point, but it really is of paramount importance. If it turns out that this is the way the government expects these banks to be run we are in a very, very serious trouble. At a time like this we need to have confidence in government, not just banking institutions.
I'm really scared now.
Complain about this comment
You can't have "get back to basics" of lending only to people who will pay the loan back, and at the same time meet the Government condition that money is lent to small businesses in trouble, and lending must get back to 2007 levels. Madness.
Complain about this comment
Robert, I agree with much of what you say. As the banking industry is commoditised it will shrink of its own accord.
The same applies to life insurance. It should comprise only whole life and term. Endowment policies are a con to earn commission.
The same applies to pension schemes. It is a disgrace that pension contributions are placed in equities instead of gilts. It came about in the sixties, when inflation started to erode cash values. Once inflation was under control, equity-linked pensions continued because the entire financial services industry was now on the gravy train.
The same applies to the share market. The gambling is a smoke and mirrors device behind which it is possible to cream as much as legally possible in fees and otherwise.
Each is a method to confiscate cash surpluses accruing to the working and middle classes after they have seen to basic needs for food and shelter. People do not think they know enough to take personal responsibility so they entrust their surplus to third parties under the delusion it will be invested in their interests.
Once all these activities are commoditised, there will be a big reduction in employment in the financial services sector. Unfortunately, government will lose a major portion of its revenue stream.
Also, a political party stands behind any government, making the laws. Unfortunately it cannot guarantee the longer term interests of its constituents because it is only temporarily in power.
For these reasons I cannot see change coming from the top. The whole edifice is comprised of thousands of hands all washing each other.
Instead, it is a bottom up, evolutionary process. Bubbles depend on gullibility.
Perhaps before the end of the century individuals will start putting their own surplus money to proper use. Just like 500 years ago when many western people eventually got fed up at not being allowed to deal with their god direct but had to go through a priest. Many people decided to deal direct and, lo, the reformation happened, and the heavens did not cave in.
This process of disintermediation – getting rid of the middleman – at that time was helped by the invention of the printing press, which enabled rapid diffusion of knowledge and information. People made up their own mind once they realised they had one. So, too, today, it is possible that the internet may serve the same purpose. Five hundred years ago, self-determination related to ones subjective internal world and religion; now it relates to the objective outside world and money.
When will people start caring about their own money? After which big recession? Who knows.
Complain about this comment
Gosh, everyone really believes the Gordon hype about fat unethical bankers.. Attack is the best form of defence. What about the government, when did they pipe up about the silly levels of lending? By all accounts they still think lending needs to *resume* to those levels. What we have experienced is not so much the instability of individual banks, but of the system itself. And the stability of the system is not the responsibility of the individual bank. It's the responsibility of the government.
Complain about this comment
Wow- to think I should live to see this. The phrase- absolutely amazing - is overused but this is absolutely amazing. Looks to me as if Brown and Darling have really done the business- so thanks to them both. It does not quite go far enough for me to forgive some of the stuff Labour have done but they have come good in a crisis even if in part they and other Governments have been at fault - and I think they have done the right ting- it still might not work but I think it gives us the best shot. At the same time as protecting us taxpayers pretty well, they have given a good Presbyterian bloody nose to many a greedy so and so in the City without I think reducing its potential to be a real money earner for the UK and for many who work in it. The City of the future will probably be a much better place to work but with fewer multi millionaires.The shares obviously took a nose dive as the conditions on the bail out means the classic value of a share- present value of future cash flows accruing to it- is not a lot just now.
The real sting in the tail for a couple of Scottish MPs is what would the SNP do now in an independent Scotland- give the rest of us our money back with interest! £35bn is quite a pill for them to swallow.
Complain about this comment
I'm starting to think that the BBC actually WANTS turmoil in the world economy. It's the best day so far in this 'crisis', a recovery plan has been detailed, all of the major stock markets have seen record (?) gains in the space of one day. And what can the BBC muster up in the top headline position? "Bank shares fall despite bail-out".
Just doom and gloom. It seems it's all the BBC can do. The Corporation has been extremely irresponsible in its reporting over this entire issue. Confidence plays such a huge part in the world economy, and yet the BBC seems hellbent on eroding confidence at every opportunity.
I'm all for reporting the facts, no matter how bleak they are, but get a grip, BBC. You can almost see the news anchors salivating on BBC News.
Complain about this comment
It's only about a year ago when Sir Fred was so bold to say to his staff that they will all get the maximum 10% profit share for years ahead! No there's a banker that didn't have a clue what was going on in his organisation.
You should be ashamed Fred, but you did the right thing and resigned (or were you pushed!). But at least you've got your pension hey! Tough times ahead for Sir Fred - I fear not.
Complain about this comment
Surprisingly testy little piece Robert - though nowhere near what the broad mass of the new shareholding English public would say to these chaps if we could get them in a quiet room for 10 minutes or so!
BTW in relation to Pt 8, are you aware of the biggest video on You Tube ever - released October 1st 2008 - which is "Zeitgeist:Addendum". Inter Alia it starts by saying that Fractional Reserve Banking can NEVER work.
I, and many others would certainly appreciate your views.
Complain about this comment
Amen, and amen again.
Let's hear it for boring banks and bankers, who understand that steady growth of capital trumps everything else.
Complain about this comment
I am a little concerned.
I presume that, assuming the global banking industry comes out of this mess, these banks will be privatized again at the earliest opportunity.
Why then is the Lloyds TSB/HBOS merger, for which competition law had to be temporarily "adjusted", still proceeding.
Surely the purchase will be part-funded by the taxpayer leaving us with a privatized superbank later on when, in fact there was no need.
Would it not have been better to have fully nationalized HBOS and bailed Lloyds TSB, leaving a greater level of high street competition at the turrnaround.
Complain about this comment
HBOS and RBS being bailed out? Is this not a fiendish Sassenach plot to take over venerable Scottish institutions on the cheap?
Complain about this comment
You have changed your tune Robert, in February while pouring scorn on Northern Rock you described HBOS and RBS as "well run banks".
The wheels are in motion the day of reckoning for you, Vince Cable and Mervyn King is coming soon.
Complain about this comment
Risk appears to be getting a bad press at the moment.
Most of the UK, if not all, has benefitted from the risks that not just banks but most organisations have taken in the past.
But ultimately greed took the banks (and some house buyers and stock-market investors amongst us) over the edge and that's far worse than risk.
Greed amplifies problems. And greed along with disproportionate returns is what stuffed us in the end.
But don't stop risk altogether - we need it to a certain extent to keep growing.
Complain about this comment
Robert I think it unfair not to include the regulator the FSA in the incompetence quotes.
A colleague of yours pointed out that letting the pack out without a lead was bound to lead to this it seemed the FSA held the door open for the pack.
Can you also tell us if the package etc so heralded by GB was created by the Bank of England.If this assumption is right it shows the folly of oversight and regulation in the same place .
I worry if the architect of the supervisory failure is now in charge of the failed banks.
Lunatics in charge of the asylum springs to mind.
Complain about this comment
Robert Peston it is quite outrageous that you and your BBC colleagues should lump Lloyds TSB with HBOS and RBS and to claim as you have just done that Lloyds has been guilty of the poor lending that characterised the other two. This is just not the case. But for the take over of HBOS, which I hope will not take place, Lloyds would probably be similar to Barclays and not require the Govt's help.
You should perhaps consider Sir Tim Congdon's words today. Shareholders in Lloyds like the other banks' shareholders will be impoverished by compelling the Banks to take loans. It is tantamount to theft and quite wrong.
Complain about this comment
Where are these wealth creating industries. There has been precious little support for any new technology, any high tech infrastructure. Can you make any more banal comment than this. Do you think everybody else is just leaving a vacuum for Britain to leap into. There is no strategic thinking in this country.
Complain about this comment
My god. People are on these blogs thanking the Great Clunking Fist for having saved the world's financial systems. Are they all mad?
The man who declared the end of boom and bust, the man who tried to fool the economy into thinking that house prices were going to rise ad-infinitum. The man who has just taxed away our futures, our childrens' futures in the pointless hope of re-inflating an already burst bubble.
The markets have a rally for one day and people are declaring that the bad times are over. He might as well have declared that in his hand he had a piece of paper.
It's nice to have a bit of good news, but god, if you think that it's over, you are sorely mistaken.
There are trillions and trillions out there in funny money and debt that needs servicing.
It has not even begun.
Complain about this comment
Let's hear it for the Cooperative Bank then! It would be a supreme irony if in a couple of years the only surviving domestic privately-owned bank were one set up on communitarian - indeed 'socialist' principles. I suppose making a virtue of 'small-c conservative' banking fundamentals also helps.
Complain about this comment
How is a Government Debt Obligation better than a CDO which seem to be the cause these problems in the first place. They both seem to expand the money supply without limit to keep the system running.
Complain about this comment
"some bankers themselves have been chastened and will choose to mend their ways" and some are arrogant bar stewards who have expressed no remorse even though their actions will result in a poorer standard of living for millions.
fred the shred and mcdollop should be stripped of titles and pensions.
Complain about this comment
You now have to ask, as a country what have we left to generate money? Consumerism was funded by this credit "party". We have little in the way of manufacturing. Farming has been bankrupted by supermarkets. Finance was all we had...
Complain about this comment
Spot on, that man Peston ...
Complain about this comment
Of course Brown wants banks to keep lending, its the only way the country has survived during his term with mirrors and smoke screens.
Complain about this comment
'Farview' wants his BBC reporters to be "dull and invisible".
I think the vast majority of contributors to this blog would strongly disagree with you Farview.
It really was a cheap shot lifting Robert's quote and flipping it back at him like that.
Are you not capable of original thought?
Complain about this comment
.. and which Chancellor has been responsible for not noticing, and certainly not correcting, the hubris of banks over the last 10 years?
And which Prime Minister now seems to be suggesting that it will be A Good Thing if house prices resume their rise, when we all thought the real problem was that they were already way too high, with prices propped up by too much debt?
And who was it who allowed part of this hubris, excessive debt and property bubble to be generated by a tax regime that made house ownership a one-way bet for buy to let landlords, made it easy for them to buy with debt, and help drive prices out of the reach of ordinary people (unless they took on too much debt...)?
When it comes to hubris it doesn't come in a much more obvious package than Gordon ('I have achieved an end to boom and bust') Brown!
Complain about this comment
You can pretty much guarantee that whenever someone says "it's the end of an era" that it isn't. Eras are usually seen to have ended only in retrospect, and even then, it's a matter for debate.
Anyone who worked in the finance sector in the late 1980s will recognise the views doing the rounds at the moment. Reckless lending, spiralling house prices, people must view homes as a nest not a nest egg, banks demanded all their money back at once, banks must think longer-term, back to basics, lessons must be learned, etc.
It took the banks about three or four years to go back to exactly the same foolishness. And they will again. The government have proven (with water, gas, electricity, telecoms and railways) that they are poor, weak, largely ignorant regulators. They will want to offload the banks as soon as possible so that they can demonstrate a return on the loans made to the banks, and get it off the national debt figures.
For a couple of years, the smarmy, arrogant, vacuous 'City boys' will keep their heads down and take no bonuses. Then it will start again. We need to attract the best of the best. A suitable reward for expertise. Encouraging innovation. We'll get the same old lie about the City producing 25% of our GDP (it does nothing of the kind). The media will fall under the lazy spell of how world-class the City allegedly is.
Plus ca change...
Complain about this comment
The Law of Unintended Consequences.
What effect will a perceived reviving economy have on the elections in the USA in 3 weeks time?
Might Gordon be taken off Barack's Christmas Card list?
Complain about this comment
Banks should indeed be boring, but blaming this mess on Thatcherism is way too simplified, if in any way this is meant to exonerate her sucessors (of either party).
Let's remember that Mrs Thatcher left office almost two decades ago. I'm not defending Thatcherism in any way, but there are two points that really should be made in the interests of balance.
First, Mrs Thatcher inherited an economy on the brink of collapse after years of serial Labour failure - that's why her policies were drastic, too much so with hindsight, but big problems need drastic actions. Anyone remember the IMF bailout, or the winter of discontent?
Second, since then we've had the hapless Major and the 'end of boom and bust' Blair/Brown regime.
This blog seems overtly pro-Labour, something which doesn't surprise me at all. But opinion polls and focus groups seem to be saying two quite distinct things about Brown:
1. 'We'll trust him to deal with this mess for the next eighteen months'
2. 'After that, we'll chuck him out'
If that's what the public mood really is, it's encouraging.
And it makes sense. We're in for a nasty recession. There will be many casualties, amongst them this government.
Complain about this comment
In this long saga of battles to contain the fall-out of subprime lending and casino- style derrivatives, hardly anyone seems to defend the interests of the common shareholders.
Shareholders are considered to be collateral damage in this battle, they took a risk and therefore suffer the consequences. But who are these shareholders, apart from big pension and investment funds?
Millions of average UK citizens.
Now the Chancellor and the PM insist on RBS, Lloyds and HBOS shareholders loosing their dividends for years to come.
How do they expect bank share prices to rise under these circumstances? Why would anyone take up the rights issue now?
If politicians were concerned with limiting the fall out of part-nationalisation for average bank shareholders, they could have at least allowed the dividends to be paid in shares, if circumstances improve. Now there is little incentive to either keep holding these shares or to take up the rights issue.
Complain about this comment
Robert,
Can you prove and provide evidence that both RBS and HBOS have been incompetent?
If so and when? Did you provide this information to the BoE and FSA, and if so, when?
Complain about this comment
Quite right, Robert.... and a very good thing too.
It has certainly been the case that a large part of the so called success story of the City of London in the financial services sector has been a complete sham - a bubble that has served those within it very well, but which has left the rest of the country in a complete pickle now that it has burst.
esowteric in 1 makes some good points. To expand and add others:
Off balance sheet vehicles/SIVs set up by banks etc were indeed always a complete con. Given that if these vehicles failed, the banks knew they would still have to stand by them, they have simply deluded themselves (and the rest of us) that both sides of these things don't constitute any part of their assets and liabilities. What an amazing deception perpetrated in full view of the regulators....!
Basel 1, Basel 2, might as well be Bo**cks 3, and Bu***it 4.... the capital adequacy ratios of 6% etc always were stupidly low.
Mad cap contracts - agreed. Urgently needs to be some better transparency and understanding of these instruments for everyone involved, but particularly amongst the very directors of the banks who use them. (... I'd like to see the FSA setting exams for each and every bank director, testing their understanding of these instruments, and then not licensing them to use anything their directors cant understand, compute and explain.....).
Additionally maybe this is a good time to draw a greater distinction between betting and banking, along the lines of..... if you wish to call yourself a bank, then you can only use these regulated instruments. However, you are very welcome to use any other mechanisms, in which case you will call yourself a Betting Shop/Index etc. (..... Royal Scottish Betting plc or Morgold Lynch Bets Inc)
And one other aspect of this so called 'light touch' regulation regime that has proved inequitable and confusing that we should clear up at the same time are these quasi British territories/associations/dependencies etc that confuse people by, on the one hand, apparently coming under the British umbrella of regulation etc but, on the other hand, being 'offshore'. While they may not in any way be regulated by Britain, they nevertheless trade on Britain's name, and consequently cause this confusion. Now that we finally have seen through the 'dont regulate in case we kill the goose that lays the golden egg' sham, we should also now move to regulate all British dependencies if they want to stay as such.
Lets leave the dodgy offshore financial centres to other countries.
Complain about this comment
intriguing that Victor Blank didn't just ditch the HBOS merger. The prize in a less competitive world must be enormous for LloydsTSB to accept, apparently unnecessarily, HMG as a 40% shareholder in the combined entity. Or perhaps arms were twisted so hard that Dennis Stevenson had a few moments in the driving seat...We'll never know ! But can we expect HMG's preference shares to be paid off very fast in this case? !
Complain about this comment
A good summary of what has happened and some of the implications. I'd just like to add here, that lending to households (for mortgages) must not only be subject to creditworthiness, but must also (as a sum) reflect the total savings by other customers. In future there cannot be net borrowing in the sense that the British society as a whole borrows from the rest of the world to live now and pay later (never). This will not be possible again unless Gordon Brown can convince some unsuspecting Martians to invest in UK Ltd., but I guess it might be rather the US or China who are the first to visit Mars and tap into this new source of unlimited and unearned money.
Complain about this comment
Oh I do love the Downing Street PR machine and their spin today.
They seem to be forgetting now that the UK Government's proposed solution was based on a Swedish model from the early 1990's.
It's not all down to our Scottish duo. Although, I do have to say Gordon is at long last looking a much more confident leader. Poor David. Ho-hum.
Complain about this comment
25 Retrogamer:
Absolutely right. Maintaining borrowing at last year's level is both (a) impossible, and (b) daft.
Business will need ongoing loan capital, but at lower levels as the economy contracts.
Maintaining mortgage lending at 2007 levels is impossible, and would only result in people buying houses in a falling market (because the house price-to-earnings ratio needs to correct down into the historic 3.5-4.0x range from the recent peak of about 8.0x).
As for maintaining credit card and other consumer borrowing at 2007 levels, the very idea would be madness. Not just banks but consumers too need to learn to be prudent and realistic. Capitalism may or may not be dead; living on credit cards and tick most certainly is.
We do indeed need clarification of a statement which, taken at face value, seems crazy.
Complain about this comment
Hey Robert, remember what you said two weeks ago? "Buying HBOS shares is like buying a £10.00 note for £6.50"
Or this one "The Lloyds TSB, HBOS merger will happen without further revaluation"
Took your advice and loss a fortune!
Thanks from all the people who have collectively loss billions because of your misleading quotes and sensationalised reporting!
Complain about this comment
Finally, we might just get the high speed rail system 20 years later than needed. If the price of a busted bank is the delivery of effective infrastructure:- bring it on! Jobs, technology, engineering and manufacturing skills. Why not?
We have dropped so far into the falsehood of wealth creating financial services that we even based our creation of homes for people on low incomes on the rising land and property market. Complex deals are unravelling everywhere. Sites with planning permission for valuable mixed use regeneration schemes are stopped dead through the lack of credit. We have no plan B. What a sorry state to be in.
I don't feel smug. Like most of you I let this happen.
Complain about this comment
Now about those credit default swaps....
how about declaring them non-binding? Would it really be the end of life as we know it? Or would it be a bad thing?
Complain about this comment
25. RetroGamer
Yes, I would like to know that too. I read it this morning and I cannot stop thinking and worrying about it. My gut tells me that this statement has something to do with someones desire to be reelected. Hopefully "lending like in 2007" is just an empty slogan...
Complain about this comment
How long have Barclays been given ?
Will Marcus, John and Bob pull it off ?Will reality catch up with them ? Or can they do a 'Morgan Stanley' ?What do you think, Robert ?
Please let us know soonest!
Complain about this comment
If posters are going to analyse Robert's comments, then they should look closely at some of the language he has used.......it shows that he has been reading the blogs and just toned some of it down for broadcasting!
I'm glad the roller coaster tended to be fairly straight and steady today - I was getting a severe headache with all the ups and downs!
I'm still not convinced it's a lasting solution though - but again, we'll have to suck it and see.
Still no balance sheets for banks or governments? No declaration of off book debts? No prosecutions, no investigations, and no repayment of bonuses?
No change there then!
When I heard the story of the attempted storming of parliament, I thought it was angry public and got all excited! Oh well, angry climate protesters is just as good!
At least it gave everyone else something to talk about for 10 minutes!
Complain about this comment
It most certainly means that we are not near the absorbing that asset values are more uncertain than at any time since the 1929. This is the crux of the matter. What is a traditional asset worth? The production of ballon debt (CDS CDOs, etc.) has had the effect of putting a question mark over the 'real value' of an asset. Until the money market and funds are confident of a floor, the attraction of financial equities is very hard to determine. At the moment the whole of the OECD is looking to create, or uncover, a stable financial 'nucleus' among the myriad of exotic particles that have spun out of orbit. The difficulty, to extend the analogy, lies in ascertaining the decay life of what is left and its affects. This is not over by a long chalk and as more banks seek capital in the *next* quarter, the solidity of the system will be even more tested.
Complain about this comment
"....which is to provide finance and nourishment for wealth-creating industries"
One wants to add, 'if we had a few real industries'. Kind of evokes again the word "Thatcherism" that appears in your blog. There is never just one person to blame. But there's one who'd go on the shortlist.
Robert, thanks for some great reporting.
Complain about this comment
Esowterics first safeguard (#1) is well taken but too vague to be really helpful. Seen from afar, the UK housing market is simply crazy.
Very roughly, the present average price of a UK house is £160K: average salary, £25K. From now on, there's no real prospect of a reputable (part-) nationalised bank lending a creditworthy working couple more than 3.5 times the man's verified taxable income, and on three cast iron conditions: that the principal is less than 80% of the market value of the property; the lender's survey is favourable; and the monthly repayments are not more than 30% of the man's after-tax income.
Some simple arithmetic shows that average house prices in the UK must still fall, to about £105K. Higher average prices than this and prospective purchasers will have to find the additional equity themselves. With the risks of recession, rising unemployment, and higher taxes to meet the interest expense of the bail-out, banks' lending policies are set to be unprecedently cautious.
For houseowners who may wish to sell in the foreseeable future, such a fall seems a ludicrous prospect. But the massive changes in the banking landscape will not put the speculative lending policies of the past 15 years in the hands of a lot of sentimental, more ethical loan officers. Not a bit of it! The new generations of loan officers will be job's-worth bureaucrats who will not be paid for performance but to follow the rule book, period! That's how the hideous nationalised industries run by successive Labour governments treated us from 1945 to 1979. Ugh!
Anyone who has a debt to a nationalised bank should watch out. Within a few months friendly, helpful, courteous, customer-friendly banking will be long-forgotten by most bank customers, and much lamented by their wretched debtors. Banks will feel like most post offices, but the buildings will look posher!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
So RBS, HBOS and LloydsTSB are 'saved', but what of Barclays?
Is Barclays really as strong as it makes out? HSBC has reasonable first tier capital ratios, but Braclays must raise 10bn pounds as ordered by the FSA. Is it known who these benefactors might be?
The also have been a massive tumult of concern about the throw away line that mortgages should return to 2007 levels, even though this does not appear in the Treasury statement. Has anyone traced the source of this statement?
What provision is being made for the rescue of the other banks and building societies? Do they need rescuing? Some statements we made about this last week, but all is silent now.
Complain about this comment
Robert writes ... "investors on the stock market gave something of thumbs down to shares in Royal Bank of Scotland and HBOS" ... a good theory, but not the correct one.
The market is simply reflecting the new valuation of these shares ... no dividends and a greatly diluted share value has now been priced into HBOS and RBS. Lloyds also gets hit because they are being dragged down by the agreement to consume and digest HBOS.
Barclays ... who opted out ... are up .. not as much because they have declared no dividends ... but still up because no dilution for shareholders .... yet.
Complain about this comment
SADLY HERE WE ARE AGAIN SO: HALIFAX ,BANK OF SCOTLAND, LLOYDS TSB ,RBS,NATWEST.
WELL YOU CAN HAVE ALL OUR MONEY SO LONG AS YOU THROW IT AROUND LIKE YOU DID IN 2007!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HOW STUPID?
ITS TIME THESE GUYS WERE BROUGHT TO BOOK.
ALL BOARD MEMBERS/DIRECTORS MUST RESIGN.THEY MUST ALL BE SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL BANKRUPTCY & ALL BE SUBJECT TO 15 YEAR DISQUALIFICATION NO IFS NO BUTS.
BROWN MUST CALL AN ELECTION.
LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE.
Complain about this comment
Have to agree with 41. What have we learnt from overly sharp rises like todays stock market performance?
Overly sharp if not directly proportionate falls.
House prices went through the roof 5 years ago at an unatural rate and we thought that this was natural. The gov should have intervened then but it never.
Tip of the ice berge i think.
Complain about this comment
27 knoseykneel says:
'Perhaps before the end of the century individuals will start putting their own surplus money to proper use.'
I agree with the knoseykneel' sentiment and I think that Brits are singularly poorly educated in money and related quantitative matters.
Although it seems not to have helped them avoid the crisis, it is, nevertheless, very noticeable how much more financially savvy the average US citizen is.
Returning to the UK after 14 years in the US we were astonished to see the ridiculous and naive adverts for financial services that people here seem to fall for.
Some fundamental money-sense could surely be taught in schools, enough to enable the kids to handle money sensibly and to enable them see through the rubbish pushed out at them by banks and insurance companies, and to see through the spinning and manipulation of economic, employment, inflation and other social statistics by the politicians.
It should not take a century to create a much more financially-literate and effective society, given some good, numerate school-teachers.
Complain about this comment
Has anyone done the numbers on Lloyds TSB
Preference shares are on offer at 12% and if the shareholders do not take them up there will be no dividends for a few years on their ordinary shares.
So:-
Cancel the HBOS takeover, buy the Pref and take up the ordinary rights. Keep the dividend at say half the current level.
Is that not a better deal than the one the government is offering.
Why not do this instead of buying Gilts from HMG,getting 5%, and letting the government take 12% from Lloyds with it??
Complain about this comment
60. RP is a reporter not a financial advisor. Peston is doing an awesome job.
Complain about this comment
The taxpayer is now well and truly on the hook as any sensible private investor will be looking to ship out of banks where the government is involved and move it into other areas. No dividend for up to five years doesn't sound appealing.
There will therefore probably be a continuing slide in the value of bank shares at RBS, Lloyds, and HBOS with greater levels of government funding going in just to keep them afloat.
An alternative and better use of central government funding would be to introduce a mortgage interest tax credit for low income borrowers, combined with an insistence that central bank funds being pumped into the market go out on loan to enable households to reschedule their finances over the business cycle. Changes are also needed to court powers to allow them to modify mortgage agreements when borrowers are in default. That would put a floor under the housing market and allow it to readjust over the long term. At the moment the government and bank of england are treating the symptoms and not the causes
Complain about this comment
#56
an offer of enoblement has been known to work wonders in the past!
Complain about this comment
Robert, i doubt you'll read this but here goes.
As much as i admire your professionalism i do wonder why you see that Thatcher was the panecea to the ills of the banking industry.
I dont ever recall you mentioning Thatcherism in the negative tones that you have recently and to put this into context, when did the French and Germans and any other country you care to mention that is in this mess ever embrace the virtues of the Iron Lady?
The banks have got us where we are and since Mrs T went out with the bath water we have (as a country) embraced what she stood for regardless of ones polital persuasion
Complain about this comment
great blog as usual
can someone explain to me why the HBOS Lloyds TSB deal is still going ahead?
how can a company that is having to borrow money from taxpapers being allowed to skip competetion rules to take over another bank that also is also getting a tidy handout! and if HBOS are getting a couple of billion pounds loan why does it still need taking over? logic defys this??
Complain about this comment
Dear Robert,
I like your blog and you have provided good information on the credit crunch.
I also like boring banks and invested in Lloyds TSB , which was very boring and responsible, but had a reasonable dividend.
However for some reason it decided to involve itself with HBOS and the government and ended up with less capital per share than it had before.
How did it do this ?
Kind Regards
John
Complain about this comment
The banks and regulators got it wrong over the last few years but, think about it, we now have the regulators running the banks!
Complain about this comment
So we have maybe bailed out the banks. Some of the top bankers may lose their jobs. Others will take their place and after a couple of years as the economy begins to pick up history WILL repeat itself.
The ONLY thing which drives this economy is the housing market. Prices will rise again and people will still demand to buy a house, and a car and have two holidays a year and to furnish the house with the latest designer kitchens etc etc. The politicans will not have guts to not allow it to happen and we will be back o 130% mortgages while the estate agents up the prices and the mortgage brokers lie on their applications or find ways around the rules.
History repeats itself UNLESS the government and FSA have the guts to say NO.
Vote
Have they the Guts Yes?
Have they the guts No?
Complain about this comment
I'd really like to believe that we are seeing the dawn of a new world. But I'm not so sure. When I arrived in Britain in 1991, homes were being repossessed left right and centre. Everyone was talking about negative equity. As a result, the banking industry decided to restrict mortgages to 3 times people's annual salary. Then when I left Britain in 2004, banks were lending up to 6 times annual salaries, forgetting the lessons painfully learned a few years earlier...
Complain about this comment
Posts 14 and 45 have got it right, what is our national industry now? We have no big manufacturing base, house building was the last big employer we had and that is wrecked, banking is bust, that just leaves agriculture and they are under the thumb of the supermarkets. The utilities all belong to foreigners (Electricite de France own the power stations, Germans own the water), manufacturing has gone to China who now have the buying power to pick up shares in what is left of our industry and prop up the surviving banks. As 14 says, we could move somewhere else, but where?
Complain about this comment
Whilst it's good to see banks cut down to size, it hardly helps when the public have to pick up the tab.
The "never never" is about to be abruptly cut and this fake economy is going to crash around the governments feet - an entire generation at ease with a seemingly never ending supply of credit is going to be stranded.
We could see a "winter of discontent" to rival that of 1978-79
Complain about this comment
Four or five years ago I sent an email to one of now departed CEOs asking him why it was that despite its huge profits his bank wasn't prepared to put up any risk equity capital to fund high growth start-ups or uni spin-outs.
After a while I received a letter back from him saying basically that it wasn't a part of their strategy. I keep that letter on my wall and may now get it framed.
I did write back asking why it wasn't part of their strategy but I don't think I ever got a reply. Obviously that was far too difficult a question for him to answer!
Complain about this comment
New Law. Banks cannot grant mortgages to the public. Only Building Societies not listed on the stock market. No Society can give a mortgage for more than 75% of the valuation of the property NOT THE MARKET PRICE.
Don't all howl at me at once or hang me from the nearest tree.
Complain about this comment
#68
I have seen the same comment several times now and am driven to comment on the fallacy.
The assumption implicit in the calculation is that every house costs the average amount and everyone buys the average house starting from zero.
Just suppose a really expensive house is on offer at £10M and a 100 cheap ones are for sale at £100,000 then the "average" house is for sale at a touch over £200,000.
Average is a dangerous construct to base any calculation on.
Very few people start in the middle, they start with a small house, pay down some of the mortgage, build up equity and move to another, more expensive, house.
That is not to say that house prices will not come down, maybe by a lot, but spurious arithmetic is not bringing any clarity to this.
Complain about this comment
Whats all this about Thatcherism?
Did the other eurpean countries, who are also experiencing problems, embrace Thatcherism?
Didn't Gordon Brown remove even more reglatory safeguards than Thatcher?
Complain about this comment
Thought that you would be interested to know that this morning I received a letter from BOS which among other things said "Using sophisticated modelling tools our Investment Review can: Open up financial options you may never otherwise be aware of"
Complain about this comment
Robert, I quite agree with your analysis about Thatcherism/monetarism – its as if a whole stage in modern capitalism (1979 - 2008) has unravelled and been discredited in a matter of weeks. But I worry that memories can be very short – a quick recovery might make it more difficult for us all to learn lessons. And the big issue is what next!
Much media coverage of the crisis focuses on the crisis in confidence and financial bad practice. But there is less linkage with deeper, difficult and more intractable issues – such aas the unsustainability of unlimited economic growth, dwindling energy resources (peak oil, peak uranium), our difficulty at feeding the world’s population (with rising population, rising food prices, environmental damage), and the real biggie – climate change and a threat to the entire biosphere.
One way forward would be a new economic settlement that includes environment/sustainability as a key element – an interesting article in Sunday’s Independent was titled “A green New Deal can save the worlds economy”
Complain about this comment
Can someone answer this question for me.
(please ignore the figures I'm making them up)
For every £1 deposited in the banks, the banks would lend out £30, so they would go to the money markets for the additional £29, where does the money markets get that £29 from?
Complain about this comment
I thought it was laissez-faire, not laisser-faire. Or am I wrong?
Complain about this comment
It's amazing. If someone had addressed the Labour Party Conference last year calling for nationlistion of the Banks they would have denounced as crazy. How the world has changed in 7 days!
Complain about this comment
There will be a public inquiry; only its form is unknown. A judicial inquiry or a class action? Either way it will be 2012 before it sees light. Probably two parliaments away.
What offers do we hear for the mammoth RBS Gogar complex about to downsize? Vaunted economist FM "wee Eck" must have comfort to offer?
Complain about this comment
What is becoming very clear in the light of the banking fiasco is that banks as well as airlines, insurance companies, computer businesses and all the other global players complete with unintelligible call centres in the East have become UNMANAGEABLE.
The banks along with the other business types I have mentioned are basically too big to be managed properly and all the IT wizards in the world will never replace a human with a brain and authority talking to another human who deserves the respect of dealing with a human with a brain rather than a system or machine that simply wastes time, money and causes grief.
There is obviously a maximum size for any business or organisation before it becomes totally inefficient and introspect.
The NHS is another example.
Maybe businesses that get to a certain size should automatically be split or nationalised in the public interest!
Complain about this comment
IN NOVEMBER 2006 I PRESENTED/SERVED A STATUTORY DEMAND ON HALIFAX PLC.
NEEDLESS TO SAY THE DEMAND WAS IGNORED.
I CONTACTED ALL REGISTERED DIRECTORS INCLUDING LORD STEVENSON AND VISITED THE COMPANY SECRETARY IN PERSON.
I WAS STILL IGNORED. THE HALIFAX ONLY RESPONDED WHEN A WINDING UP PETITION FORM WAS FAXED TO THEM.THEN THEY HAD THE CHEEK TO THREATEN TO SERVE ME WITH AN INJUNCTION.
THESE ARE THE KIND OF PEOPLE THAT RUN HALIFAX BANK OF SCOTLAND.
THEY ONLY RESPOND WHEN ITS TOO LATE NOW THEY HAVE A FURTHER CHANCE TO SQUANDER OUR MONEY.
Complain about this comment
BUBBLES, Bubbles, bubbles
You can not provide paper worth nothing to support paper worth nothing. There is not enough notes out there to pay for this stupid, stupid world 'task force' to move lending.
In order for these corporations to survive they need to lend, in order to lend they need people to borrow. In order for people to borrow they need to be credit worthy. The old days of credit worthyness has gone and now they have to be 'REALLY' credit worthy. Lending collapses, interest rates a lowered to nothing and in some countries the Government pay you to borrow.
But you cant because you are not worthy,you have lost your job
Ford and GM are bankrupt the 10s of thousands of subsidiaries go bankrupt.
DOES THE GOVERNMENT OF THE WORLD PUT MORE MONEY IN ?
Of course not, as they are bankrupt as well
Hanker down, protect your family because this is going to be a long, horrible, world changing event that will see unrest and strive not seen for ninety years.
Read! God Dammit read!
Complain about this comment
The People now own half the Banks
- oh really ?
Just like the People own the National Health Service would that be ?
Yes just what we need with an army of Bureaucrats swamping the Front Liners, with decisions being taken for political rather than finanacial (or Health) reasons.
Quangos, Control Groups and Gov Depts stuffed with people who never made a financial decision in their life but who 'have shown party loyalty'.
So bung the equivalent of Councillors and Partichekniks a few hundred grand each for working 3 days a month and for having no idea; and yet who will be running what is left of the Finance Industry.
So very NewLabour
- lots of flag waving
- lots of money
- no real analysis
- no real problem resolution
What book debts were cleared off with the handouts ?
Or does nobody know what our money went towards because nobody has reported the Book positions and the future borrowing Liabilities to the 'owners'
ie the People
Will mortgages become more affordable for the first time buyers ?
Will pensions and SIPP's be improved ?
Will the Government 'spend, spend, spend, until you die' messages be reined back?
'Exceptional Times need exceptional responses' (Brown, Darling, Cooper, etc etc, offering the standard party line)
aka - 'we will indulge in sleight of hand, illusion and cover up, whenever we feel like it, so clear off instead of asking questions we were too dim to ask'
More Central Control, bigger Spends, bigger Taxes, more inflation and more Cock-ups envisaged.
Or should I simply reserve judgement and trust in the past record of Brown and co?
Which as an option, doesn't exactly sound too confidence filling.
Complain about this comment
carregwen wrote:
I thought it was laissez-faire, not laisser-faire. Or am I wrong?
Who cares?!
Complain about this comment
Fellows....
It seems evident that sustaining 2007 levels of mortgages is simply not going to work.
What does the government hope to achieve through this?
The underlying facts are very simple: Established Britons (older and with property) have been getting rich, stretching the social fabric our society in the process. We cannot sustain this in the long term; prices need to come down to give the younger generation a chance to be able to prop them up in their old age.
To put it bluntly: there needs to be a serious wealth redistribution in this land. If this is achieved through wealth destruction than so be it.
Complain about this comment
an e-mail to my son working in australia
Mark
In line with the new policy of the undemocratic party of the once great Britain which is now to be renamed little Britain we have to inform you that your bank NatWest is to be renamed Gone West and is now in my possession as a taxpayer as it has been seized and has been nationalised Would you please make future payments of your liabilities to the new Gone West Bank into my account at my Chinese bank so that I may get some recompense for what this will cost me.
I will inform you of the Account Nos etc in a future e-mail
Complain about this comment
And if solutions to credit availability and savings protection are really looked for, then quite simply....
...separate the Retail Bank side from the high risk, more chancier Investment Banking side.
With no cross over of funds.
Complain about this comment
#96
re Public Enquiry
The question is; Trial and retribution or Truth and reconciliation...
Complain about this comment
Lord Turner and the Government say that the chief executives of the banks in which the Government is buying shares will not have bonuses this year and that in future they will not get bonuses if they fail. That seems fine, but only up to a point.
Some weeks ago Robert Peston in a tv documentary described the asymmetric nature of the bonus system that international financiers enjoy and which yields them large bonuses for deals that bring surpluses, but no personal losses for deals that bring losses. This, he argued, had been driving the concealment of sub-prime risk.
Unless this asymmetric system is changed, not just for banks in which governments have bought shares, but for all of them, the financial system remains at risk of the same troubles recurring.
Until recently, of course, any one government would hesitate to intervene, claiming that it had to go along with the system, otherwise the most talented financiers would go elsewhere and the national economy would suffer. One benefit of the current crisis is that governments have started to work together on reform of the international financial system: and they may be willing to confront this kleptocracy.
Complain about this comment
Gordon has been banging on about long term fixed mortgages for ages, so that we are not so sensitive to interest rates. He is right. He should now encourage our banks to offer these products; this would allow BoE monetary policy to work without the perpetual fear of hurting the home owner with interest rate rises.
Complain about this comment
How many times can you use the word taxpayers money?
That same money pays your overinflated salary Rob.
Complain about this comment
Is there some sort of poetic justice and eerie coincidence that, as you say, one the main strands of Thatcherism should pass away today of all days, her birthday (13/10/1925).
Good riddance to the idea that markets will regulate themselves and with it the hope that all those bankers and businessmen will respect their better natures and not the one which of course is far more powerful - simple greed.
Unfortunately the ethos is so deeply ingrained both here and more so in the US that this will not be the last time the system will be messed up and need to be bailed out as this is not the first.
Oh for the days you went to the bank to see The Manager and not one of a dozen different type of "specialists" and you could actually telephone the branch and speak to someone who knew, and cared, about your business - Unthinkable! Now you have to navigate the interminable messages and press buttons to speak to someone you do not know and who doesn't know or care about you.
Unsurpisingly not many people will mourn the passing of these "great" institutions or the pain their bosses have brought to their staff, customers or to a lesser extent shareholders.
Complain about this comment
How many times can you use the phrase taxpayers money?
That same money pays your overinflated salary Rob.
Complain about this comment
#24
In the boom times very few people wanted to listen to those warning about a coming global financial crash - and look what happened.
Ignoring well-founded and extremely well-researched warnings about a coming global ecological crash is just as foolish.
Complain about this comment
''Whatever the economy needs to maintain itself, the government will do it.''
(Edward Bond)
''We may seem competent, but by the end of next century there will be new deserts, new ruins. ''
(Edward Bond)
Complain about this comment
Robert,
Your true colours are beginning to show as you become overconfident in your newfound celebrity.
"But as boom year followed boom year, and fat bonus followed fat bonus, many banks and bankers became over-confident, arrogant."
Yes that's it. Get the distraction tactics working. Get the publc focus onto the blamehounds whilst the culprits slink out of the back door.
"the tide turned decisively against almost-anything-goes, laisser-faire financial capitalism (what I described yesterday as an important strand of Thatcherism) - which has been the prevailing ideology for almost 30 years."
Ah, the old depenable classic. Get the argument going as to whether the left or right are to blame for the current debacle. There's no difference between left and right. They are both equally complicit in this mess. Indeed there's no difference in their fiscal policies.
The extent of your propaganda would make George Orwell turn in his grave. So much for the "Ministry of Information."
It is obviously left to the posters on this blog to provide the remainder of the readers a true perspective on this manufactured 'crisis'.
The root cause of this debacle is the desire to operate the illusionary system of debt-based, fiat, Rractional Reserve Banking.
In this system the 'victims' are deluded in to believing that their collection of counterfeit pound notes actually represent the store of labour which the system pretends to represent. Only when the average Joe Bloggs tries to spend his ill gotten gains does he find that his little bits of blue paper buy almost nothing. That is the secret behind the inherently inflationary Fractional Reserve Banking system. It silently and stealthily steals from your stash of stored labour no less effectively than a burglar breaking into your house.
Mugabe Brown said today in his press conference that he intends to return us to the lending levels prevalent in August 2007. That is his stated manifesto. To take money from you without your permission, give it to the Fractional Reserve Banksters and then lend it back to you at a profit.
It astounds me that the british public are so gullible and asleep that such a profound swindle goes relatively unnoticed. Where are hte demonstrations in the street. Where are the angry mobs asking for heads on a plate?
This is no fix. It is a temporary reprieve. When the next wave of Derivatives and Credit Default Swaps start to hit the fan this charade will be exposed for all to see (that is, all who want to see).
Complain about this comment
It seems to me that one of the most important things for a Briton is house prices.
Gordon Brown is trying to prevent a house price crash just so he gets re-elected. To achieve that he will force the big banks, which he now owns, to start lending as they did before, but this time with tax-payer's money.
Perhaps people will at last vote Labour out for the years of spin, burying bad news, unnecessary wars and destruction of the economy.
But there is no credible alternative. One would vote Tories just so they get rid of Labour - not because the Tories have said or done the right things. After Brown has encouraged the banks he now owns to start lending as before, the Tories should be shouting from the roof tops and there should be mass protests.
However, it seems that as in the banking world, everything goes in British politics. next thing Brown is going to double taxes and council tax and no British person is going to say or do anything.
And when the Tories come to power they will find a million excuses for not correcting Labour's mistakes.
Like an ancient Greek tragedy we are going from bad to worse, in a downward spiral, and I cannot think what can take us out of this spin, save a deux-ex-machina.
Complain about this comment
#103
Shouldn't that have been, Natwest is now known as the "Nationalised by Westminster Bank"
Now were did I put my coat?!...
Complain about this comment
Whilst I fully accept the banks have problems, many of them of their own making, there are one or two ironies:
Lots of complaints when the banks were making lots of money and riding high and now lots of complaints when they are at risk - we either want a place at the top table of global finance or we don't, we can't have our cake and eat it
Where was the government when all this was happening - our prime minister was the "prudent chancellor"
I notice that Robert Peston wrote a book about Gordon Brown in 2005, I haven't read it yet but aim to get hold of a second hand copy to see if he identified the contingency plans Brown put in place for when growth slowed or even disappeared - I have a feeling I will be searching for some time!!
Complain about this comment
Robert or others.
Potential Confusion on terminology
With the differrence between UK and USA billions being an order or two of magnitude, it would seem to be important to know exactly which terminology is being used by HMG. £37-50 UK billion works out at in excess of £500,000 per person in this country. (assuming 65 million people) and the UK definition of Billion (million million).
With RBS audited assets stated as £1,900,519, 000,000 (2007 yr end), £20 billion aid seems rather alot, assuming this is 20 million million or 20,000,000,000,000. ie this amount of money is nearly 10 times RBS stated assets.
Whilst all the headlines make good reading, what are the basic numbers? HM Treasury doesn't spell it out in simple numbers, and perhaps I have got it wrong too?
Can any one help to shed light on this. If the numbers are as I have stated then we should perhaps be asking some other questions! I hope I have them wrong.
Complain about this comment
WELL THEN FELLOW CITIZENS WE ARE BACK TO ANIMAL FARM.
I HAVE A CUNNING PLAN.
LETS CALL IN THE IMF (INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND)
LETS DO IT BEFORE ANYONE ELSE DOES.
OH YES UNCLE HOWARD LETS PRINT LOTS OF MONEY TOO.
PLEASE BROWN PLEASE GO SEE THE QUEEN AND CALL AN ELECTION YOU'RE FIRED.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#14
Gordoom has thought of that. Our new economy will be based on creative stuff (accounting?) by MEDIA STUDIES graduates!
Complain about this comment
We have been skating serenely for the last 20 years.
Our troubles brew and we hesitantly tread.
We feel the heat and we crawl.
Alas we're still on thin ice.
Complain about this comment
85-jimk60 :
"As 14 says, we could move somewhere else, but where?"
It's quite nice here in Spain - if you can find a buyer for your property in the UK :o)
Complain about this comment
I work for Lloyds TSB. I am very concerned that the takeover of HBOS is bad for the bank.
We are told that LTSB is the 6th most secure bank in the world , and the most secure in the UK, and have a very strong capital base.
Yet LTSB is absorbing a bank that has serious problems; is the government pushing this through ?
Without this I doubt that LTSB would need the capital injection from Gordon Brown.
This just breeds a lack of confidence in LTSB, which in reality should not exist.
Complain about this comment
The FTSE has a great day as do other markets yet the BBC headline and that of Peston is Bank shares fall despite bail out.
Is anyone at the BBC a glass half full man or woman or are you all eternal pessimists.
Once again I ask for just a modicum of optimism as we all could do with a bit of cheery news.It might even help the mood of the nation, so can you please try, you might even enjoy it !
Complain about this comment
So we live to fight another day.Still a wider issue concerns me.All these government guarantees around the world covering depositors' savings,new government capital being injected into the financial system et al.Where is the money really coming from - is it really there or do we just sit back and let Governments ramp up the printing presses ? What happens if it all goes badly wrong,will Governments really be able to pay out ? Look at Iceland.
I can quite happily sit here and issue guarantees for billions assuring all and sundry I am helping by doing my bit ; of course I cannot pay out on very much of it at all.
Are we not close to its all being done by mirrors ?
Complain about this comment
ALWAYS SEEMS STRANGE TO ME THAT WHEN SOME PEOPLE HAVE POWER HOW MUCH IT GOES TO THEIR HEADS.
MESSRS BROWN,DARLING,MANDLESON ETC HAVE STITCHED US ALL UP PERIOD.
Complain about this comment
With the gurantors of the market now becoming the governments I wonder how well placed Sterling will be to resist any more speculation.
I also wonder if there is any possibility that what we are seeing is Britain giving up sovereignty of Sterling. Is this entry into the Euro through the back door?
Complain about this comment
The printing presses must be burning hot in the Bank of England, trying to print all that money that Gordon Brown has promised to the banks. And no, he has not suddenly discovered gold buried in his back garden. To pay all he has promised he will be printing new 20 pound notes.
The only thing that might save the pound from collapsing is the European countries doing the same and start printing Euros, so that the pound does not look too lonely.
However the derivatives crisis is yet to reveal itself. With the government's intervention (printing more money to cover losses) many people are predicting 2 an 3 digit inflation soon.
Which means start buying gold.
Complain about this comment
There is a certain tradition of state takeovers of the banking system on this day - seven hundred and one years ago, on Friday 13th October 1307, Philip the Fair of France nationalised the Templars, with the Pope under his thumb.
Complain about this comment
That was just so succinctly put - perfect. Whilst I agree with everything you said I still say it is a great shame that it has had to come to this. In principle government should not own banks!!
Complain about this comment
#117 bigfanovlov
Billion as commonly used is 1,000 million both in the US and now in the UK.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billion_(word)
Complain about this comment
As a new small high-tech. UK manufacturer which EXPORTS most of its products (cameras to Japan, Korea, USA etc) I am simply dismayed by the bigotted rhetoic often seen in these comments.
The fault clearly lies with the 'easy-money' - fantasy money mentality of the financial services which started in the Thatcher era - and now that the dream has ended and reality caught up all those that 'championed' the City think that somehow they've been cheated or blame Brown, the Euro, the Yanks or anybody else but themselves.
Financial services are needed but they should never be allowed to become more important than other truly creative sectors of the economy. Such wisdom is even enshrined in several of the major world religeons.
UK manufacturing needs help - real tax breaks and seed-corn funding. In other countries it seems governments are just falling over themselves with schemes to kick start 'real' high tech companies (i.e SBIR in US) - but in the UK nothing (or it costs more to access such funds than the funds are worth) probably because few if any of those that are in politics have any grasp or let alone practical experience of the very industries we now need - they are financiers, jounalists (sorry Robert), economists, GPs and the like. Easy money in finace was simply more attractive.
Lastly - perhaps I should add I quote/sell in Euro's (even in UK) - which has been a much more stable currency than good old GBP.
Simply a global view.
Complain about this comment
@117, welcome to the wonderful world of loadsamoney politics. Nothing adds up here, which is hardly surprising with an election coming up.
Complain about this comment
Basic banking I understand. What I never understood was how parcelling up dodgy sub-prime mortgages in packages that then went round the market in ever decreasing circles as they were cut and diced and sliced, so that nobody knew who was exposed to what - I never understood (just to start the senetence again) how that was supposed to grease the wheels of the free economy and capitalism. I hope someone will explain one day how that was supposed to help the economy grow - apart from the Keynsian bit of having bankers spend their enormous and undeserved bonuses.
Complain about this comment
Two quick comments. Firstly, the regulators need to take this opportunity to regain some face and end the proliferation of complex derivative products which they (and in many cases the users of which) don't really understand. The securitisation (i.e. the bundling up and selling on) of debts has its genuine purpose, but so convoluted and complex have some of the vehicles for this become that its impossible to properly understand the risks behind them. This is why even today we still have no clear idea of the true value of the assets currently claimed by our banks. To a degree even they don't.
A lead on from that is - don't believe that this is over. Today is an important step forward and if it truly frees up the interbank lending system then it is genuinely beneficial for all businesses reliant on borrowing and for anyone with a mortgage. It does not, however, mean that the remaining banks are truly solvent in the medium term. Some of the banks involved in today's recapatilisations have taken their CDS (credit default swap) exposures and marked them down on their balance sheets according to how likely they are to be worth their book value at the end of their term. Some of them have done this by varying amounts. Some haven't done it at all. Either some banks are being overly pessimistic or others are being overly optimistic. Alternately you could view the it as some being pragmatic and others being naive. As they are effectively valuing the same assets differently, they can't both be right.
Complain about this comment
90 "Whats all this about Thatcherism?"
Well things like swopping shipbuilding for Starbucks is what all this about Thatcherism is about, in other words the issue of placing the blame for the demise of real industry in the UK, which while one can argue this way and that about it happens to have been one of the themes in this blog so far. OK?
Quite a trigger-word for the comatose, "Thatcher", isn't it?
Complain about this comment
Mr Peston,
What a vitriolic piece of "reporting".
You never cease to amaze me. We all know you are closer to Brown than even Mrs Brown but still even by your standards this piece really stinks.
The glee with which you report the end of one of the threads of "Thacherism" is truly gross. How you all laughed and clapped when the City and all those "badly" run banks paid taxes for your multitude of public sector workers and quangos.
How appreciative you all where when Gord and Tone spent billions of pounds of the taxes on their half baked pet projects but secretly it must have really hurt that something that didn't come from the left actually led Britain on the way back from the brink of the chaos that was the 70's back in part to restoring the "Great" into Britain. In what other industry do we lead the world?
Now finally when one of the cornerstones of capitalism falls you run around in glee. Feathering your own nest and putting in more appearances with more "scoops" than any other business reporter.
You really should read some of your own old posts to see how your opinion changes with the wind and government spin.
You sir make me ashamed to call myself British.
Complain about this comment
#126
As did Thatcher (and her 'political children') so no change there, except that those who actually make things and earn REAL money for the economy might actually get some respect now...
Complain about this comment
What shall we do?
Retrospectively ban the C D S dealings and anything in the unregulated area.
Open GOLDLINK, a government owned bank deposit backed by whats left of the gold reserves so it is trusted. The money flows in a circle from private to Goldlink back to private.
Divorce Treasury from private bank liabilty,although I cannot see how.
Put money into key areas of designated business that must survive ; probably small and medium businesses based on cost effectiveness.
Sleep well, Robert.
Complain about this comment
it is curious, isn't it, the way it used to be called 'government money' but now it is a far,far better thing - it is 'taxpayers' money'?
The Responsible Gordon leading us with our backs against the wall...oh dear...oh Lord Myners. Doesn't he look a bit like Robespierre and Gordon like Danton?
The tale of two cities.
Off with their heads !
Complain about this comment
The banks won't change their behaviour and stick to self-imposed restraints on lending and risk-taking for very long - and nor should they.
There's nothing fundamentally wrong with 125% mortgages or high income multiples, or with structured credit arrangements etc. In a competitive market, it's right that banks should push against constraints, and they will inevitably do so.
What has hitherto been wrong is that the banks' own Individual Capital Adequacy assessments and the FSA's assessment of the capital they must hold have grossly underestimated the potential losses resulting from those risks.
And capital requirements should have been raised further when it was clear that consumer debt levels were becoming excessive and house prices had lost touch with reality.
If banks find that they need to hold 10 times as much capital to take these risks, then the price at which they offer the risky deals will have to rise so much that few customers will buy them.
Regulation should work by realistically raising the cost of taking a high risk profile - not by banning products or supposing that banks will know better next time.
There have been bank busts before, and behaviour has always reverted to the competitive norm after a while - why should 2008 be different?
Complain about this comment
You`re undoubtedly a sharp fellow, and you`ve kept us mightily well informed about one of the most depressing episodes in our economic history.
Please, can you now help emphasize the positives as well as the negatives. We know we`re in a deep dark hole; we need you now to at least strike the match!!
Kind regards,
Ash
Complain about this comment
before "investing" billions of pounds in the banks i presume Gordon& Alistair carried out due diligence so they now know exactly what the taxpayers exposure to the toxic debt is.......or did they forget this crucial step?
Complain about this comment
I was wondering how big the golden handshakes the CEOs and Chairmen of HBOS and RBS are going to get? It strikes me that it is very much the norm for failed executives to get big pay-outs from their companies when leaving before their terms would end naturally, so I can't see that this will be any different.
Complain about this comment
Now that the government controls or otherwise influences the major banks I trust it will enforce an inflation busting max 2% pay-rise (no bonus) across the board -
Now that would convince me.
Complain about this comment
.....er hang on a minute does the BBC inhabit another planet? The PM was the chancellor and he's been in power for 11 years! This guy set up the failed banking regulation system. Brown ramped up and encouraged debt. Brown raided pensions so people invested in property. Brown presided over the biggest national debt in the developed world. Brown undermined other industries, increased taxes and hindered other businesses, bloating the public sector massively and squeezing out the private sector. Brown did nothing to address the crisis when it started to emerge over a year ago. This is nothing to do with Thatcher who hasn't been in power for nearly 20 years, although the BBC appear to have not only accepted Browns spin but taken delight in trying to add to it. Brown has left this country the least well equipped to tackle the recession. Can we start hearing the truth from the BBC ?
Complain about this comment
Agree with Post 4's feeling that good stock market news seldom enjoys the same BBC enthusiasm as bad news. This is supported by Post 30's view, but, frankly, the vast majority of Posts here reflect pretty miserable, negative attitudes. Come on, folks! We are where we are, all of us, and can only move forward now. Let's try to be a bit more positive! Really, things could be worse. Post 52 reminds us of what Margaret Thatcher inherited in 1979 with the Winter of Discontent. What was inflation then? Oh, yes, only 27%.
Complain about this comment
Please could EVERYBODY now stop talking about the Banking INDUSTRY and its financial PRODUCTS. This is all nonsense. Banks store, invest and lend money - that's just about all. They do not manufacture anything (except anxiety, fear and dubious, imaginative bubbles of convoluted financial deals that make fools out of human folly - see Marlowe's Dr Faustus).
Complain about this comment
Yes, the banks - or at any rate many of them - have been arrogant & foolish. But there have been plenty of people happy to borrow well above their means, including extending their mortgages to finance current consumption. In more realistic circumstances, perhaps that message should be getting across too. The political party that's prepared to point out to people that you are responsible for the outcome of your own financial decisions and that not everyone can have what they want when they want it all the time will get my vote.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Pesto, Have you seen what's happening to Gilts?
Looks like if Broon wants money we're going to have to pay a lot more for it!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Doesn't affect me but just where are all these High Net Worth punters going to put their wealth now the toxic paper has been shown up for what it's really (not) worth?
Let them eat gold and drink oil.
Complain about this comment
It may mean the end of free market policies in the UK, but they were never very free with 40% of the economy controlled by the government and an implicit assumption borne out in practice that banks would be bailed out. Naturally in this circumstance there was never any need for independent monitoring of bank creditworthiness.
The banks have been negligent and in a free market should have been allowed to fail, perhaps with a bailing out of depositors' interests given that the government had given an implicit guarantee.
It is a sad day when taxpayers have to fork out GBP 40 billion and much more in the way of guarantees etc.
'Thatcherism' may have died today but that only is a cause for regret since the economy will be the worse for it.
Maybe with a few years of poor economic performance in prospect, Thatcherism will revive?
The nationalised banks will be scrambling to make loans at all costs to bring their loan volumes up to 2007 levels. Sensibly having abandoned this strategy they will now have to restart. More tax payers money on the line as more bad loans happen! How extraordinarily silly.
The financial markets are factoring in property price falls of 25% or so in the next 3 years. Lending with LTVs of 80% is foolish in this circumstance. One needs to do proper simulation calculations of likely loss and mark all assets and all liabilities to market to enable one to establish the solidity of a bank. Will the accountancy profession accept this for banks? THey have for insurers, hence the lack of concern in dealing with the insurance industry. One knows where one stands with an insurer. With the banks, they themselves have no idea of whether they are solvent or not absent a governemnt guarantee. How incompetent and how silly to do business with such entities (absent a government guarantee).
Anyway the good news is that you can put your savings with any bank, however incompetent they remain secure in the knowledge that the taxpayer will bail you out.
What a way to run a country. There should be widespread sackings in the FSA and government not just in the banks. They are the people who are letting the country down. But the conservatives are likely no better. More bad news then.
Free market economics always operates even if policies are socialistic.
Complain about this comment
When complaining about bankers' bonuses, please differentiate between the incompetent buffoons on the bank boards, together with the investment bankers playing in their glorified casinos.
I work in commercial banking and have exceeded my targets for many years - this means bringing good quality, long term profit to my organisation. In exchange for this I have received 100% bonuses. If this were cancelled I would receive a 50% pay cut and would leave. Please remember, for many bank staff, bonuses were introduced to reduce the amount of remuneration that was pensionable - not to fund a yacht in the Med.
If the govt wants to see a return on its investment, it will need the best staff to stay on board.
Plus Broon will be lining himself up for Chairman of RBS in Goodwin's ex swanky office in Edinburgh for when he's ejected by the electorate?
Complain about this comment
With the number of people now saying 'well of course it was obvious this was going to happen' which seems quite reasonable - I never understood how house prices just kept on soaring, but why would I when it suited me - it occurs to me to ask where the leaders of the G8 recruited their risk managers from, because this whole thing has clearly caught the whole of the leaders of the 'free world' on the hop. Did no one at Davos suggest that it might be a good idea to have a rescue plan in place just in case this happened? Were all the bankers and politicians so blinded by their power and luxury that the possiblity of this didnt occur to them? What craven idiots we are, to think that these people know how to manage the economy. I must say this whole thing has done wonders for my self esteem as a manager - but then nobody could possibly manage any worse than that lot.
Complain about this comment
Captain Mainwaring has won the battle against that "stupid boy", the upstart junior bank clerk from Canary Wharf.
The consequences of this part, quasi, semi, nationalisation of the UK banks have yet to be realised in the city. It will be deep, far reaching and radical.
In taking public money the City has entered into a faustian pact with government. Does the city realise how the government rules, regulates, emasculates and castrates the public sector? Well, they will now.
The city is full of public schoolboys, not Labours favourite kind of people.
Inevitably the stock market is going to be significantly diminished and the government bond market and private equity will come to the fore.
Investors and pensions funds crave the certainty and security which the stock market patently does not provide.
Even FT 100 companies will issue corporate bonds rather than shares. How many share holders, pensions funds, insurers and hedge funds have been wiped out in the share markets?
The UK stock market will inevitably be yet another casualty of the credit crunch that snowballed out of America, in Brown's words.
Sir Philip Green, chairman of BHS is in a position to acquire the failed Bauger group precisely because his company does not issue shares. If his was a publically quoted company he would have been wiped out along with the rest.
For the city types the nationalisation of the banks and by default the City of London is going to be anything but boring. These golden tongued alchemists are in for the ride of their lives.
Complain about this comment
Re: Thatcherism
So many are pointing the finger at Thatcher as the architect for this current debacle but ultimately it's archaic vitriol aimed at the wrong target. Did Thatcher oversee and to a degree accelerate the decline of Britain's manufacturing industries? Yes. Out of spite? No. She was simply the first leader that we had that acknowledged the fact that increasingly at the time and ultimately as has been proved, we were in no position to compete with the Far East in that respect. Anything we could build, they, with their cheap labour and partially built and therefore flexible infrastructures, could build better and cheaper. It was a losing battle and a good general knows when to admit defeat and retrench, however expensive that retreat as it is always better than outright defeat and surrender.
With regard to today's financial crisis, yes, the reforms of the eighties did to some degree pave the way for our banks to get themselves into serious difficulties, but that happened recently, not 20 years ago. Had Thatcher (or some successor) have still been in power, perhaps they along with their economic advisors who truly understood the economic system that they had allowed to propagate and therefore understood how the animal worked MIGHT have been better able to control it. Instead we got a government with absolutely no idea of how to control the beast that they had inherited and instead allowed it to run wild all the time that it was inflating the economy and generating lots of tax revenue. Those at fault are much closer to hand.
Complain about this comment
Wrote a letter to my Dad in the UK this morning... Thought I'd post it here too -
Hey, look Dad, even though I may come across as a Commie, I hope I am able to put into perspective the fact that I have grown up in the era of excess, and have known no different (I didn't experience the mismanagement of the economy pre-1980's) - the thing is... neither have you, not really! - You've seen a few wobbles in the 70's and '87, but being a war/post-war baby you haven't really seen hard times - there's always been hope visible on the horizon... I can see hope on the horizon now, but its a long, long way off, and it lies in a necessary change of ideology (that change will happen 'necessarily' not because people think it might be a good idea!). The ideology we have existed under for both of our lifetimes extends from a 200 year long phenomena which started in earnest in the late 18th century in the United Kingdom - Industrialisation, and which is ending now with advanced (or 'casino') capitalism - which manifests itself most poignantly in social terms as the abandonment of ethics, and in business as the principle that anything is fair game.
The fact is that no system, whether it be Communism or Capitalism can be applied to mankind universally, because mankind is animal and systems are abstract - anyone who is deluded enough to think they can is like Its like some proud inventor who designs the smoothest, most fastest skateboard as panacea to that irksome problem of walking, only to realise that they will never get rid of all the stones on the road, and that the potholes will keep appearing... In my opinion, the best we can ever hope for is that those charged with the duty of making decisions for the many are wise and virtuous, equitable and... without influence. And that is a sentiment that cannot have changed throughout human history. Unfortunately, the reality is that the extent to which 'influence' compromises 'wise, virtuous & equitable' grows with mankind's abandonment of ethics and neglect of his place within nature... And so here we find ourselves.
Complain about this comment
Robert,
The bank do face great humiliation.
The regulators are to blame as well.
But there is a third party to be blamed for this mess as well. That is the public globally. Were we not the ones who mortgaged ourselves to the hilt? Were we not the ones who took loans to fulfill our numerous desires and wants? Were we not the ones to go on expensive holiday and not be satisfied with the offerings closer to home?
I request you to write something on that as well. The public needs to understand the real cause of this mess.
The banks failed, the regulators failed but at the same time the people failed......and if for a moment we do agree that the banks did take them for a ride (which I don't believe can happen to such a great extent to bring about a complete financial collapse) ....where were you at that time with all your opinions....? Perhaps you were taken for a ride as well!
Complain about this comment
Lloyds TSB Shareholders are being treated very badly. We bought our shares like many investors for the Dividend return. Now Lloyds TSB is being bounced into taking over HBOS and the Government is dictating we will not get our Dividends.
If we had put our money on deposit we would have a return on our investment and which is guaranteed.
Lloyds TSB shareholders should vote against the so called merger with HBOS.
Complain about this comment
> others will be hectored
Lovin' it..
Elsewhere on the web,
> Gordon Brown promised to wage war on bonuses
..I can hear it now.
"You're either with us, or you're with the bonuses."
"There are bonuses capable of hitting us in 45 million!"
"And I say to the bonuses -- bring 'em on."
Complain about this comment
156 mirkle
I think I understand what you're trying to say. I believe that many political, financial and industrial leaders will have had thoughts like: "what is going to happen if this card house collapses?" Their conclusion will have been: "Well it may happen at some point, but I will either be dead, or retired and even if the worst comes to the worst and it happens in the next few years, I have my money in safe places and I can always blame someone else and write a book about it". Just look at Brown. He's the architect of the gigantic personal debt bubble in the UK. Yet he tells us all these days that he is leading the world through this crisis that of course has nothing to do with his actions. It appears logic that no-one of these people blew the whistle, as it could have been the trigger of the collapse that deep inside all of them must have feared.
Complain about this comment
What people seem to have forgotten is that putting aside the UK picture for a second, most banks and financial institutions, including hedge funds, are holding vast amounts of the close to $530 trillion dollars of Credit Derivatives.
You don't need all of them to go bad for a domino effect to start, and Lehman's may just well be the first domino which causes the rest to begin to totter and then to fall.
Those derivatives were extremely convoluted and not even most of the main players understand how the heck they work or what they are actually worth today, they were far, far too busy spending the vast upfront commissions they made on them.
For people who don't know how they work, think of them as insurance policies, or put another way, a bet on something happening or not. You insure you house, the insurer is basically betting on the fact that if he insures 1000 houses, that it is highly unlikely that all 1000 will burn down. But the derivatives got stupid with people betting on the bets, and then betting again on those, trying to hedge the chance of making a loss to the point that the total market of those derivatives is worth over 10 times the global GDP! Can you imagine insuring your neighbours house against burning down? Wouldn't you be tempted to saunter over when they were out and leave the chip pan on so you got paid?
The Lehman's derevitives in the form of the Credit Default Swaps were auctioned off last week, and those left holding the baby are going to have to pay out something in the region of $400 billion. What happens if they can't? They go insolvent, and so the next domino falls and so on.
If we really want to get this crisis to be over, then there is really only one feasible option for the global community to take, which is to declare null and void all the derivatives, all £530 trillion of them.
Come on pundits, are you as worried about these "investment vehicles" as some economists seem to be? Warren Buffet who I am sure most people know is a pretty money savvy guy calls them "Nuclear time bombs" and has refused to invest in them.
Complain about this comment
The Western World is planning to inflate its' problems away. No doubts considering the amount of 'new' money in all currencies that is being generated.
We will know when the powers that be really 'GET' the problems that got us here into this mess now when they include house prices within inflation figures.
They can then set a sensible and acceptable (read realistic) rate for inflation, say 4-6%. Should housing increase, then inflation will increase, and the levers of BOE control will be pulled increasing rates and returning house price inflation back to the sustainable norm. No more 100% inflation as was seen between 2000 and 2003.
CPI ignoring the biggest purchase a consumer makes in their lifetime is not a Consumer Price Index.
This is what has caused the artificially low rates, the explosion in the money supply, and all these dodgy investment vehicles designed to utilise this extra money.
I repeat, this was all an inevitable outcome from bucking market indicators which CPI is. It was all to relieve the workload of Politicians who hate dealing with inflation, because plain and simply, it makes their heads hurt.
Complain about this comment
I've only been following these blogs for a few weeks, but a lot of posts either angrily criticize Robert Peston or applaud his articles. Obviously, he can evoke very strong feelings.
But is there any evidence that he reads any of our posts? This is not an implied critisism (though I have seen other blogs where there is more response to reader feedback.) Right or wrong in his views, he must be very busy, and I wouldn't be surprised that even if he wanted to read them, he might not have time.
And if there's no indication he is reading them, why not skip the plaudits and censure, accept that he (and perhaps the BBC) does or does not agree with your view, and focus on the important issues?
If you really think Robert Peston deserves censure (or praise), why not write to someone higher up at the BBC?
Anyway, the people we'd really like to read our views on the issues are the bankers and politicians, and they probably won't take the time either (since they have all the answers, of course!)
Complain about this comment
I don't need any more warnings I'm simply withdrawing my funds from RBS. They treated me with little or no respect and so I don't feel that I owe them my hard earned, for them to play their games with.
Complain about this comment
A big thumbs down from The City to Scottish financial competence then?
Complain about this comment
So they like Preference Shares after all.
Three cheers.
Shame they couldn't do something more constructive for Bradford and Bingley.
But well, British Shareholders have no rights.
Remember that if you consider buying Shares.
Your investments can be plundered, not just by shortselling, not just by your Pension manager lending your Shares, but also by a Gov't which doesn't think things through.
Not only is the City corrupt, the FSA weak, but the Gov't is heavyhanded.
Invest at your peril.
Complain about this comment
I am still confused Robert. If the problem was caused by too much debt how can it be solved with borrowing from the taxpayer who are the ones with too much debt? Isn't that a bit like removing a hole in a pair of socks by cutting the hole out?
Complain about this comment
# 76
I am assuming that you are either 1) a BBC employee. 2) related to Robert Peston or most likely 3) a left wing peasant who enjoys seeing the downfall of the markets.
Your comment is ridiculous as I never said that Robert Peston was a Financial Advisor.
The BBC is supposed to be impartial and therefore should only report what is relevant and accurate but unfortunately we can no longer trust its integrity. Whether you like it or not the BBC report on Northern Rock was responsible for the run on that bank and that cost investors billions of pounds. If Robert Peston hadn’t sensationalised his report the NR’s customers would not have been queuing outside the bank the following day to withdraw their money.
The same goes for last weeks drop in the share values of RBS and HBOS. It was his report on a top secret meeting that caused the share prices to drop by up to 60%. This report was stating that the banks were begging for handouts, but this wasn’t the case.
In general I think Robert Peston does a good job, but there are many examples of irresponsible reporting which only helps his ego.
Complain about this comment
Interesting comments....Close Brothers Group merchant bank was castigated earlier this year following an abortive takeover by Landisbanki and Cenkos and described as dull and boring. It's still there lending money, sticking to good principles of lending with no requirement for goverment aid. How did the journalists and pundits get it so wrong ?
In 1974 we had a life boat for financial institutions followed by control orders to regulate the terms of lending.
If the taxpayer is expected to foot the bill is the government /FSA prepared to legislate against irresponsible lenders or are Brown & Co signing a blank cheque ?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#1, unfortunately I believe one of the conditions is that the banks DON'T cut back on mortgage lending.
Complain about this comment
#164, there was an auction last week on LEH Credit and there is a price set. The liabilities were listed a few weeks ago. So far the process has gone smoothly, touch wood
Complain about this comment
#158, it is just a desparate attempt to push blame off the current PM who FINALLY is shown to be wearing no finely woven threads.
This most certainly is not about "deregulation" and it is not about Thatcher. She had an asset bubble and they moved to crush it. Remember Brown's ongoing crowing about 15% interest rates - for a couple of hours - and crappy regulation is the only reason these structured products exist.
Complain about this comment
#92, you might want to wait a little bit before you break out the champagne to celebrate it's death. I seem to recollect exactly the same talk in the late 80s and after the dot.com bubble. Wait for the books about the "excesses" of the derivatives world and then you know it is safe to go back into the market.
Complain about this comment
Some relevant quotes from a tiny island about the effects of GREED and lack of Prudence:
Theodore Roosevelt,the 26th Republican President of the USA, and that champion of anti-trust law, warned about the diasarmament of the moral structure of society by the "wealthy criminal class". (See Edmund Morris :The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt, ( New York : Cowars, McCann and Geoghan, 1979), 193.
MORE:
"Christian Managers and entrepeneurs, if they manage as if faith mattered, must come to understand that their property and their work are not ultimately theirs and that they will will be accounatable not just to stockholders but to HIM "who knows how to ask questions". They need to keep in mind that they will be judged with mercy, but also with JUSTICE: Have they been stewards or exploiters of the property and wealth committed to them?"(See :Managing As If Faith Mattered by Helen J Alford & Michael J Naughton ( Notre Dame, India 2001, 161)
Complain about this comment
#148, yeah and exactly how many products you going to make with no investment, deposits, payments or loans?
Complain about this comment
#5, all derivative products have a very long description of the risks and the payouts. Just because people are greedy and/or incompetent isn't a reason to blame the product.
Nobody ever said they were "safe investments" but had to take extra risk to get the extra return and now the risk is biting them.
Complain about this comment
Further to post #176, if you look at the FTSE you can see what an utter pack of lies it is to talk about Thatcher and boom an bust vs Brown who has overseen two major crashes, one MAYBE not his fault - but neither was the preceding boom really his.
Complain about this comment
#52, reading this blog is like reading a Treasury Press release - down to demand for more "regulation" and blaming of Thatcher. It is worth a flick through for some of the crazier comments and a view of what the HM gov is floating as an idea.
Complain about this comment
Keynesian and Freidman economics has been replaced by Leesonesque gambling techniques using other peoples money to achieve personal bonuses. Nick Leeson was a relatively junior player in the money markets and ultimately spent years in Changi jail for his indiscretions, what can we expect to happen to the fat cats who are the real culprits in squandering taxpayers money?
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS